Because science does not have all the answers. There are so many everyday things that science can't(at least at this time) explain.
Also, just because science says something is so does not make it that way. People seem to think that because our technology has advanced so much that science is now infallible.
2007-02-14 00:47:40
·
answer #1
·
answered by ottomated420 2
·
1⤊
0⤋
This is a very interesting concept..But at first blush I would say there are inherent truths that are real even though on occasion they can't be measured. I understand that some people that get migraine headaches go through testing and scans, but nothing shows up or measured, but can you say the pain they feel in not real. What about someone who has lost a limb yet still has the sensation that the limb is still there, this can't be measured but what their feeling is real. If your thinking about religious icons and if their real, or ghosts this is a difficult subject to tackle. The human race has the ability to have faith, sometimes blind, and trust that a concept is real. Many years ago they thought the world was flat, but someone had a concept the world was round and went out to prove or measure it was round. Maybe we just haven't figured out how to measure some things yet, but then again maybe we never will...As was said above, things like love, hate, pain, and thought can't really be measured but they are real.
2007-02-14 00:59:08
·
answer #2
·
answered by Bill G 2
·
0⤊
0⤋
Indeed, there are concepts that remain real even though mankind hasn't recognized yet how to measure them.
Consider the spirit and what is the measure?
We know it exists and can say when someone is highly spirited. Or low in spirit and can make the difference between the meek and the depressed.
We can even recognize this trait or concept in other animals.
Is this concept based in reality? It is widely recognized as being real and yet there is no definitive measure of the spirit itself.
We cannot tell if when one becomes spirited he/she has gained an inch or a pound!
Q. If a tree falls in the woods and there is no one there to hear it
does it still make a noise?
A. And clearly in the sight of any bird!
2007-02-14 01:06:33
·
answer #3
·
answered by marian 2
·
0⤊
0⤋
You ask this in a category where some would argue nothing is real???
You're merely rephrasing the old "If a tree falls in the woods..." question. Reality is not limited to human perception. You can not measure that which is beyond your senses. That doesn't negate realness. Did gravity exist before Newton? Was the world flat before Columbus sailed to the other side? Does space, with no measurable end, exist? Man must be the center of the universe in order for reality to be limited to his awareness. All understanding up to this point would argue against such a reality.
2007-02-14 01:02:18
·
answer #4
·
answered by Michael E 5
·
0⤊
0⤋
There are two kinds of knowledge: necessary evident knowledge and contingent evident knowledge. The latter is the one we cant make theories of.
But this isnt answering your question maybe...
Think of it like this: imagine yourself walking in the woods. And suddenly, you fall. You appear to have tripped over a loose rock. Could you have predicted it? You could indeed. But you didn't. And you wont measure the properties (location, weight etc.) of the stone to predict future falls. That just wouldnt make sense; it's a loose rock, i has moved when you fell over it and it will move again. You could only be more careful: you could suppose a probability that you trip again. But the stone nevertheless is there. And knowing the properties of the stone would be of no effect: it has no place in a theoretic framework that helps you avoiding it in the future. And that's contingency. It's real, it's evident, but it's of no use to measure it (although someone could really hurt himself because of it).
2007-02-14 01:03:13
·
answer #5
·
answered by Johannes 2
·
0⤊
0⤋
You can measure any thing. Nothing in this universe which can't be measured. Go through Measurement and Analysis will explain different measurent and evaluation. Only the thing is you should be able to define the metrice.
2007-02-14 01:09:14
·
answer #6
·
answered by KT 2
·
0⤊
0⤋
Love CAN be measured. Recent scientifc discoveries point out the entire process of love can be seperatd into three consecutive stages: Lust, Attraction and Attachment.
Lust is the initial passionate sexual desire that promotes mating, and involves the increased release of chemicals such as testosterone and estrogen. These effects rarely last more than a few weeks or months. Attraction is the more individualized and romantic desire for a specific candidate for mating, which develops out of lust as commitment to an individual mate forms. Recent studies in neuroscience have indicated that as people fall in love, the brain consistently releases a certain set of chemicals, including dopamine, norepinephrine, and serotonin, which act similar to amphetamines, stimulating the brain's pleasure center and leading to side-effects such as an increased heart rate, loss of appetite and sleep, and an intense feeling of excitement. Research has indicated that this stage generally lasts from one and a half to three years.
Since the lust and attraction stages are both considered temporary, a third stage is needed to account for long-term relationships. Attachment is the bonding which promotes relationships that last for many years, and even decades. Attachment is generally based on commitments such as marriage and children, or on mutual friendship based on things like shared interests. It has been linked to higher levels of the chemicals oxytocin and vasopressin than short-term relationships have.
When an unit and method of measuring these changes of chemicals in body are invented, the intensity of love can and will be measured.
2007-02-14 01:25:20
·
answer #7
·
answered by Trance Addict 1
·
0⤊
0⤋
love is real. How do you measure that?
2007-02-14 00:47:59
·
answer #8
·
answered by Nina 2
·
1⤊
1⤋
LOVE is immeasurable but it can be felt tremendously...so real.
2007-02-14 01:23:24
·
answer #9
·
answered by maconsolviaa 5
·
0⤊
0⤋
I have an idea.
2007-02-14 00:47:48
·
answer #10
·
answered by Scotty 2
·
0⤊
0⤋